Comparison
KaizenProof vs a spreadsheet and a free 5 Whys template
In short
A shared spreadsheet and a blank 5 Whys template are enough to run Kaizen in a team that already has someone who knows the method and who remembers to look again a month later. KaizenProof is built for teams where nobody has that job: it asks the questions, writes the fix down and sends the reminders.
Both routes follow the same steps: describe the problem, find the cause, decide the change, check that it held. The difference is who does the asking and the remembering. This page sets the two side by side, says who should stay with the free route, and gives a way to test the difference on one real problem.
What each one does, step by step
| Step | Spreadsheet and template | KaizenProof |
|---|---|---|
| Record the problem | A row in a sheet. Any columns you like. | A sentence in plain text, optionally with how often it happens and how long it takes. |
| Name the waste | You choose from the eight wastes yourself; the 8 wastes checklist helps. | The product proposes one of the eight, in plain words. |
| Find the cause | You fill in the 5 Whys template. Someone has to ask the next why and notice when an answer blames a person. | It asks why, one question at a time, until you confirm a cause in a process, policy, tool or ownership gap. |
| Ask whether the step should exist | Only if someone remembers to. | Asked every time, before any fix is written. |
| Write the fix | You write it, in whatever form you choose. | A draft ticket, procedure or automation spec, to copy or download as Markdown. |
| Check that it held | A calendar reminder, if someone sets one and acts on it. | Check-in emails at day 7, 14 and 30 ask whether the fix held. |
| Count the time | Whatever the columns allow. Estimates and results often end up in the same column. | Hours typed at intake and hours confirmed at check-ins are shown apart and never added. |
| Work as a team | Anyone with the link can edit anything. | A shared workspace with email invites, two roles and one board. |
| Connect to other tools | A spreadsheet links to almost anything. | No live integrations. The fix is text you paste where your team works. |
| Where the text goes | It stays in the tools your company already uses. | Stored in your workspace on Google Cloud and sent to Anthropic's Claude model for the analysis. |
| Cost | Free. | A 14-day free trial with no card. Paid plans are priced per workspace, not per person, and billed monthly. See pricing. |
One more difference belongs outside the table. In KaizenProof the questions and the draft fix are written by an AI model. It can misread a situation. The person who knows the work confirms the cause and decides what to do with the draft; the product does not change anyone's process on its own.
When a spreadsheet and a template are the better choice
Stay with the free route if most of these are true. Everything needed for it is on this site at no cost: six free Kaizen templates and a free course, with no account and no email address asked for.
- Someone on the team already knows how to run a 5 Whys and is willing to do it with colleagues.
- Someone reliably owns the follow-up, and a calendar reminder is enough for them to act.
- You work on one or two improvements a quarter, not several a month.
- Your company does not allow internal process detail to be sent to an outside AI provider.
- You need your own columns, your own scoring, or links into trackers you already keep.
- There is no budget for a tool. A method run by hand, on paper, still works.
If you stay with a spreadsheet, the columns that matter
A tracker that records only a complaint and a status says little six months later. The columns below record the reasoning and the check as well.
- Date reported, and who reported it.
- The friction in one sentence: what should happen, and what happens.
- How often it happens and how long it takes each time, as the reporter's estimate.
- The waste, one of the 8 wastes.
- The root cause: a process, policy, tool or missing owner, never a person.
- Should this step exist? Yes or no, with a reason.
- The countermeasure, its owner, and the date it was put in place.
- Three check columns, for day 7, day 14 and day 30: held, partly held or reverted.
- Time confirmed at the checks, in its own column, never mixed with the estimate from column 3.
Keep the last column separate even when it is empty. An estimate of time lost is not a saving until someone who does the work confirms it, as measuring improvement honestly explains. Set the three check dates as calendar entries the day the fix goes in, with a named person on each.
Where the free route tends to stop working
A spreadsheet is passive. It holds what people put in and does nothing in between. That is fine while one committed person keeps the method going, and it explains the usual ways a tracker fades.
- Rows hold complaints, not causes. Nothing asks the next why, so the root cause column fills with first answers.
- Nobody asks whether the step should exist, so the list turns into automation requests.
- The check never happens. The fix is marked done the day it goes in, and nobody learns whether it held. The lesson did the fix hold? shows what that check is for.
- It depends on one person. When they change role, the sheet stays and the habit goes.
None of this is a fault of spreadsheets. It is the work a facilitator does, and a team either has someone to do it or needs something that does. If your tracker shows none of these signs, you do not need another tool.
A fair test: run one problem each way
- Pick two recurring frictions of similar size from the same team.
- Run the first by hand: the 5 Whys template, a row in a sheet with the columns above, and three calendar reminders.
- Run the second in KaizenProof during the trial. You can type it before creating an account; nothing is sent until you sign in and submit.
- After a month, ask the same four questions of both.
- Did the chain reach a cause in a process, policy, tool or owner, and not a person?
- Did anyone ask whether the step should exist?
- Is the fix written so that someone outside the team could act on it?
- At day 30, did someone check, and is the answer written down?
If the hand-run problem gets four yeses, keep the spreadsheet. If it stalls at the second or the fourth question, that gap is what the product is for.
When neither is the right fit
Some teams need more than either route gives. If you need single sign-on, audit logs, live integrations with your ticketing tool, statistics for a Six Sigma programme, or idea campaigns with voting across a large company, look at the other kinds of tool described in Kaizen software for office teams, which also lists when KaizenProof is not the fit.
Questions
Can we use the free templates without using KaizenProof?
Yes. The six templates can be downloaded without an account or an email address and used at work under the licence shown on each template page. The course is free to read as well.
Is a spreadsheet good enough for Kaizen?
For a team with someone who runs the method and follows up, yes. A spreadsheet records well; what it cannot do is ask the next why or remind anyone to check. If a person does both, the tool is enough.
Can we move from a spreadsheet to KaizenProof later?
Yes, by hand: there is no import. A friction is typed in as a sentence, so the simplest way is to enter the problems that are still open and leave the history in the sheet.
Try it on your own work
Pick one task that wastes your team's time every week. Describe it in a sentence; KaizenProof names the waste, asks why until you reach the cause, and writes the fix. No account is needed to start.